The progression of trailers I saw went the other way…the first ones were little more than teasers and presented it as a drama (Hancock doing that big ‘I’m the only one of my kind’ speech), then they expanded to include a couple witty lines (the costume bit) and some brooding on rooftops, then they brought out the kaboom and whale throwing action. THEN the first trailers that made it look like a comedy (‘Call me a jerk once more.’ ‘You’re a jerk.’ whoosh ‘That’s so not OK.’) finally arrived.
I wonder if Will does his patented “Oh Hell No” in Hancock. It wouldn’t be a true Will Smith vehicle without it.
(Am I not supposed to talk about seeing the movie because this thread is about the trailer? If so, skip this message…)
I saw it 2 nights ago and I found it interesting. The story goes in a much different direction than the trailers lead you to believe – in my mind, a more interesting direction. Will Smith does a good acting job (sorry, no “Oh Hell no” moment), but for much of the movie his character is pretty unlikable. And, of course, Charlize Theron isn’t hard to look at.
I say go see it. But that’s just me.
J.
I have to agree with others here. Not always a fan of big FX movies, but Smith does a pretty good job of playing against character in the movie and it definitely goes in an unexpected direction. Not the best movie of the summer so far (Iron Man, Wall*E) but I don’t feel cheated out of 97 minutes either…
BTW, nice to see that Michael Bluth finally managed to hook up with Rita!
I read the bad reviews, but I went anyway. I think it’s certainly better than the 36 that the rotten tomatoes gang gives it. I like the point that Roger Ebert made…it was cool to see a superhero movie that showed the mess they leave behind. And “the twist” – interesting idea, but the reveal and ongoing explanation of the felt really awkward to me. The “bad guys” reminded me of the crooks who fought Superman in the TV series; they never caught on to the concept of who they were up against.
Charlize Theron sue looked nice in that black outfit when she visited Will Smith at his “place”. Yowsers!
Come on, man, don’t you think that’s kind of retarded?
I thought it was good.
The “surprise” could have used more indicators ahead of time so it wasn’t a complete out of left field thing, and the whole “We’re angels!” thing seemed a bit much to pack into a 1 minute reveal with no nothing to ever really tie it into real world religion or what-have-you.
But outside of relying on exposition too much, it was good and fun. It had action, comedy, and drama each and you can’t complain about that.
I was stoked to see it based on the trailer, but in reading the total spoiler review at the “Ain’t it Cool” website I’m going to skip it. The movie apparently takes an amazingly stupid plot twist about 2/3rds of the way through, and I’m not dumping $ 10.00 a ticket for that shitstorm.
I liked it! It’s not, you know, a great film, but it’s very enjoyable and clever in its way, and really a lot of fun.
Retarded? …Her?
My wife and I saw it last night. We were apprehensive because of the bad reviews. Boy are we long we didn’t listen to them. We both really liked it. The 2/3 plot twist surprised me; and I am very rarely surprised by plot twists.
Good fun. We’re definitely glad we chose it over Wanted.
Saw it on thursday and really liked it!
A completely different take on the (usually oh so boring) superhero theme!
Can we close this one and make a proper movie thread for it? I saw it and enjoyed it and was SO glad I didn’t know there was a “twist”. I was lucky that I saw “The Sixth Sense” and had no idea there was a “twist” coming, so I was completely stunned when it happened. Just telling people there a twist exists is, IMO, a spoiler because you’ve changed their expectations about what is likely to happen.
One element that was hinted at, but pretty much skipped over to make it family-friendly was that Hancock has another reason he’s angry at the world - he can’t have sex. Any human woman he tried to have sex with would risk being crushed by his super-strength (See: Larry Niven’s “Man of Steel, Woman of Kleenex”).
“Please close this thread because the 'twist” spoiler is kind of ruining it … oh and here’s another spoiler!"
Apparently you and the AICN reviewer were watching two different versions of the movie, because the one he reviewed (review is point by point of the entire movie - total spoilers) it was more than hinted at and went into this with some surprisingly graphic detail.
I only mentioned the spoiler because several people have already mentioned there’s a “twist” earlier in this thread. The fact that his character is angry at the world is not a spoiler at all, as that fact was clear from the very first teaser trailer. Most males get cranky if they aren’t getting any.
We definitely saw two different movies. He saw a very early pre-release, and I saw it in the theater after significant cuts and very likely some re-shoots.
Really, I think this is quite an underrated film. Go see it as a matinee, go in with expectations of mildly silly, but clever fun on an interesting take on the downsides to being a superhero, and you’ll probably really enjoy it.
(However, my fiancée didn’t like it to well, but she didn’t exactly dislike it, either.)
The bad guys aren’t interesting, mainly because the movie is more about Hancock dealing with his own inner demons. I’m ok with that.
I really, really enjoyed the beginning. It was hilarious, interesting, and engaging. I enjoyed Will Smith’s portrayal of the renegade superhero. I enjoyed Jason Bateman trying to pull off the ultimate PR campaign. I do think that they really didn’t need to show the prisoner with the other prisoner’s head up his ass. The expressions on everyone’s faces and the neck brace shown later would have been enough.
The twist hit me out of nowhere, and at the time, I thought, “Nice! I didn’t see that coming. I wonder where they are going with this?” However, turns out that I didn’t much care for where they went with it. I wouldn’t call the ending bad, but it did not live up to the brilliance of the beginning.
Here’s a question. If Hancock can’t have sex…does that mean that the PR guy and his wife don’t have sex either? That would be rather unusual, don’t you think?
I’m pretty certain she can have sex with “mortal” men. After he PR had no clue about her even after years of marriage. It’s pretty clear that she’s more powerful than Hancock so it follows that she’d have better control over her powers as well.
Yeah - as stated earlier, the AICN guy obviously reviewed an earlier version, and if you’d seen the movie you’d know that. Just goes to show - just because you read it on the internet doesn’t mean it’s true. Also goes to show what I hate about sites like AICN - they happily release articles that blow away any surprises that might be in a movie, so that when people actually go see it they already know what’s going to happen, and it ruins the movie. I DIDN’T read any spoilers or reviews for Hancock, and I LOVED it.